Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
-determination of israelis and palestinians. as you know, every american president since lyndon johnson tried to stop israel from building settlements on the west bank because they understood those settlements threatened to fore close the possibility of a two-state solution. some presidents pushed hard; some not very hard. at camp david, jimmy carter believed he received assurances that building would stop and self-determination and would commence, but settlement building did not stop and carter and the egyptians for different reasons did not make too much of a fuss. ronald reagan called for a settlement freeze without making a big issue of it. george hw bush made an issue of it paying a steep political price which may have cost him re-election. bill clinton wanted a viable state, and he found settlement building cometted whether israel was headed by labor, and, indeed, accelerated throughout the 1990s. barack obama made a settlement freeze that jumping off point for his peace efforts, and he was smacked down decisively by benjamin netanyahu. the reason is obvious. israel, no matter what coalition was in ch
east. elections are coming up in israel, in jordan, in egypt, iran and elsewhere. we're seeing in front of our eyes more violent change happening in syria. the reverberations of which are being felt on everyone of that country's borders. elsewhere from beirut to bahrain domestic politics is at a low boil ready to burst out in a way that can affect our interests in very fundamental ways. there are two problems at the far ends of the threat spectrum. the iran nuclear challenge on the one hand and the spread of al qaeda and affiliated terrorism on the other that will continue to dominate and lest we forget within a year of taking office both presidents obama and bush, his predecessor, were faced with previously unforeseen events that fundamentally challenged their middle east policies. 9/11 for president bush and the arab spring for president obama. so there's a lot on the agenda. today we're going to take a early look at what will be and what should be the foreign policy of a second obama administration in the middle east. now we at the washington institute, for us this is just the beginn
talks about iran, israel and u.s./middle east policy. and later, a look at the aftermath of the arab spring including the ongoing syrian civil war and the challenges facing egypt after its revolution. >> later today, singers and musicians roger daltrey and pete townsend of the who will be at the national press club to talk about the program they co-founded to help improve the lives of teenagers and young adults with cancer. they'll also discuss their plans for a new initiative called teen cancer america. it aims to set up hospitals and medical centers in the strategic areas across the country. see their remarks live beginning at 1 p.m. eastern over on c-span. >> you're watching c-span2 with politics and public atears. weak dies fee you are -- weekdays featuring live coverage of the senate and every weekend the latest nonfiction authors and books on booktv. you can see past programs and get our schedule at our web site, and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. >> former national security adviser stephen hadley was among the speakers at a recent conference focusing o
just returned from a visit to the palestinian authority's, and to israel. the foreign secretaries call that hama hamas is defensible response but for the crisis and could end the conflict by stop bombarding israel was hard. does he agree with me that the use of long range imported missiles by hamas capable of striking jerusalem has made this much were difficult to achieve? >> yes, absolutely. it is clear that the armory of rockets in gaza has changed since the time of operation, and although there is a longer range rockets, we seen them launch at tel aviv and at least in one case at jerusalem. of course that is an escalation of the threat to israel. but it only underlines the importance of taking forward all the work on a negotiated piece and settlement in the middle east so which has been supported across the house. >> in august this year in a report that gaza would be unlivable by 2020, 44% of posting in gaza -- [inaudible] what conversation has he had with counterparts recently on increasing basic humanitarian coming into gaza and that continues to increase? >> this is a constant pa
that hope both here and in israel that the squeeze of sanctions will somehow hasten the regime change in iran. in other words it is some other purpose besides leverage for getting the concessions on the nuclear issue and that isn't withstanding the prospect that even if there were regime change, and i certainly wouldn't advise holding your breath and waiting for it, it would mean whoever comes into power and say they would fold on the nuclear issue, not likely given the broad support that a nuclear program is peaceful nuclear program has in iran. note also that a lot of the u.s. imposed sanctions as embedded in the legislation have had other issues besides the nuclear one stated as a rationale, human rights, that sort of thing, relations with terrorist groups, and so it would be very difficult here on the hill to get back down on that even if the negotiations went well with the iranians. all of these constraints do not go very well for taking advantage of that negotiating space that does exist, and showing flexibility in using sanctions for what they ostensibly ought to be used for wh
began by asking about what is happening, and what i think of the coverage of that today. any time israel is involved in the story it becomes an increase do it excruciatingly difficult story for american journalists to cover because there is for the most part a natural sympathy in this country. a sense of identity in this country and many reporters both friends and colleagues of mine, the late peter jennings used to road defeat to write and be criticized for taking an anti-israeli point of view not so much that he had spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic point of view to arabs. i fink what is happening in gaza means almost any definition of tragedy. they cannot be expected on the one hand to stand by while their cities are rocketed. on the other hand, the great irony of the paradox of that story is because the israeli defense forces are infinitely more professional than the hamas fighters. the number of casualties on the palestinian side are always going to be much greater thereby leaving an impression that there is somehow something unfolded about the war. this
to egypt. you know what right now? egypt is threatening israel. egypt is threatening israel because of the arab spring. we have to rethink the dollars we're sending to egypt. we have to say these dollars are for maintaining a security and a peace. if you're not participating you don't get the dollars. that is job one. we need our commitment to foreign poll to israel. israel is our strongest ally. it is our sister country and we need to do everything we can to fulfill our commitment. which incidentally all the foreign aid we give israel, military aid is spent right here in america on american jobs. that is one of the requirements. but when you look broadly at the arab spring, there was a lot of hope this would continue deepak civil we're falling into what has become not secular governments but religious governments. we need to be gathering up all of our allies and we need to be making a firm statement that this region needs to be stablized and we need to protect people that serve in our state departments. we knee people that serve in all facets, whether ngos or the state department.
and shorter. and so, you know, if only we see china, israel, others have drawn is now, the iranians have some jobs right now. it's going to be a very short time frame before we have to deal with the other side of that we are already dealing with cyber attacks each and every day on our infrastructure, not the kind used in the olympic games, similar. so the answer to your question is, it can reinforce existing power structures, but it can then also empower not state actors far faster than we did reinforced. >> i would say that david's concluding point is a fair one, except coming back to us, i think that we have kept ourselves still in this environment as being extremely competitive, and you reference to an area that is a key one for the s states. that is energy. the united states is number one in natural-gas. the united states has been working very aggressively in terms of ensuring that it is energy independent, and it toward this end, just the other day the "wall street journal" highlighted the fact that the united states is now has really grown exponentially in terms of its own oil productio
's all this controversy about whether or not israel is going to go to war with iran. when president obama spoke about the big yellowbird i don't think he was talking about the big yellowbird i think that he was talking about big bird on tv. chinese oriented people referred to as yellow. china has the largest population on earth, a billion people. they have so many people that the force women to have abortions. they have no respect for human rights at all, and china is friends with iran. china is trading partners with iran. if we have israel go to war with iran, then we are going to have to deal with an angry china, and i think that of really big problem, and we have to put a stop to it and negotiate peace. as i sit in the opening statement, i feel that our biggest problem is the deficit, but i believe that the reason why we haven't been able to lower the national debt is because our political system is broken, and we need to fix it or this will continue whether we have a republican or democrat in the presidency or in the majority of congress, and it is why constitutional amendment with th
was spent, okay, working with steve israel to make sure we had the intellectual, financial, whatever resources to prevail in those races. my second time that i spent was to call people who were not successful, in this particular election. because everybody here was getting a lot of calls. winning is very noisy. not succeeding is kind, the bells don't drink that much so i wanted to hear from them, what their views were about how to go forward. and then to absorb the calls of my colleagues to see what their view is. but when i talked about here about changing the role of money in politics is really a very important motivator for me. to stay in the leaders office. i think it must be done. when people say that oh, and i've read in the course of this week, money didn't make any difference in the campaign, they'll wasted their money. well, that really wasn't true. the president of the united states, the most well known, famous, respected person on the planet, had to spend about a billion dollars to set the record straight from what the other big money was putting out there. senate races, h
commitment to the welfare, security and survival to the state of israel and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. ms. landrieu: i further ask, mr. president, the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the measure be printed at the appropriate place in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. con. resolution 60 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate concurrent resolution 60 providing for conditional adjournment or recess of the senate pending adjournment of the house of representatives. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. ms. landrieu: i ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table with n
at what happened recently in the conflict from hamas, the missiles that were being shot into israel, and the system to understand the importance of missile defense. that is a system that focuses on short-term -- short-range missiles, but we all saw the number of civilians that could be protected by the capacity of having a robust missile defense system, and i can't imagine why we wouldn't want to be in the position to make sure that the east coast of our country would be as protected as the west coast when it comes to an emerging threat from iran. and there's no question that the more we hear about the behavior of iran, the more troubled we should be as a country, not only are they -- do they have a robust missile development program, but we all know that they are also making efforts to acquire the capability of having a nuclear weapon. and so now is the time for us to act, not to find ourselves in 2015 with no plans as to how to deploy an east coast missile defense site to make sure that the east coast of our country has the same protection as the west coast, and now is the time to
with israel's problems on the gaza and so on, i think that both sides will be careful to try to work as well together as they can, but they don't look at things exactly the same way. and it will matter i think, at least to the united states if we find things we think should get done at the united nations or in other ways are being stymied by china. i'm not predicting that what i would at least put a star next to that as a possibility. north korea, i think we're going to see some renewed efforts over the next several months to see if there's a path forward with north korea. i don't see the obama administration changing the terms of engagement. and our ambassador in seoul just reiterate the fact that we won't. but we'll also the new government in seoul, which i think no matter who wins, will be looking towards at least some more engagement. and that could indeed complicate things and involve both the u.s. and china, and i think we have to pay attention. finally, on these issues, i think that the focus on the south china sea and particularly the east china sea is absolutely right. i think we se
that immediately border syria and have an impact, and, obviously, israel, which is having already raised concerns as we do about, for example, movement of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere. and i could have an impact not just within syria, but on the region as a whole. i'm encouraged to see that the syrian opposition created an umbrella group that may have more cohesion than they've had in the past. we are going to be talking to them. my envoys are going to be traveling to various meetings that are going to be taking place with the international community and the opposition. we consider them a legitimate representative of the aspirations of the syrian people. we are not yet prepared to recognize them as some sort of government in exile, but we do think that it is a broad-based representative group. one of the questions that we're going to continue to press is to make sure that that opposition is committed to a democratic syria, an inclusive syria, a moderate syria. we have seen extremist elements put themselves into the opposition. and one of the things that we have t
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)